Assembling social innovations in emergent professional communities. The case of learning region policies in Germany

References

• Allen, J., & Cochrane, A. (2007). Beyond the territorial fix: Regional assemblages, politics and power. Regional Studies, 41(9), 1161–1175. doi: 10.1080/00343400701543348
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amin, A., & Roberts, J. (2008). Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice. Research Policy, 37(2), 353–369. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, B., & McFarlane, C. (2011). Assemblage and geography. Area, 43(2), 124–127. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4762.2011.01004 doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4762.2011.01004.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes, T. J. (2018). A marginal man and his central contributions: The creative spaces of William (‘Wild Bill’) Bunge and American geography. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 50(8), 1697–1715. doi: 10.1177/0308518X17707524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beierlorzer, H. (2010). The Regionale. A regional approach to stabilizing structurally weak urban peripheries applied to the southern fringe of the metropolitan area Rhine-Ruhr. disP – The Planning Review, 46(181), 80–88. doi: 10.1080/02513625.2010.10557089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beierlorzer, H., Boll, J., Borghoff, B., Kübel-Sorger, A., Post, N., & Seineke, J. (1998). Einfach und selber bauen. Ein Handbuch zur Entwicklung von Selbstbausiedlungen [Simply do it yourself: A handbook on the development of self-constructed settlements]. Aachen: Landesinstitut für Bauwesen des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen.
   Google Scholar
• Belk, R. (2010). Sharing. The Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 715–734. doi: 10.1086/612649
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blotevogel, H. H. (1998). The Rhine-Ruhr metropolitan region: Reality and discourse. European Planning Studies, 6(4), 395–410. doi: 10.1080/09654319808720470
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities of practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1), 40–57. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2.1.40
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198–213. doi: 10.1287/orsc.12.2.198.10116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butzin, A., & Widmaier, B. (2016). Exploring territorial knowledge dynamics through innovation biographies. Regional Studies, 50(2), 220–232. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2014.1001353
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camagni, R. (1991). Innovation Networks: Spatial perspectives. London: Belhaven.
   Google Scholar
• Christmann, G. B., Ibert, O., Jessen, J., & Walther, U.-J. (2019). Towards the emergence of innovations in spatial planning. The social process of innovating – phases, actors, Conflicts. European Planning Studies. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1639399
   Google Scholar
• Christmann, G. B., Ibert, O., Jessen, J., & Walther, U. J. (2017). How does novelty enter spatial planning?: Conceptualizing innovations in planning and research strategies. In W. Rammert, A. Windeler, H. Koblauch, & M. Hutter (Eds.), Innovation society today. Perspectives, Fields, and cases (pp. 247–272). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
   Google Scholar
• Christmann, G. B. (2019). Introduction: Struggling with innovations – social innovations and conflicts in urban planning and development. European Planning Studies. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1639396
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, N. (2012). Urban policy mobility, anti-politics, and histories of the transnational municipal movement. Progress in Human Geography, 36(1), 25–43. doi: 10.1177/0309132511407952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danielzyk, R. (1994). Regionalisierung der Ökonomie – Regionalisierung der Politik in Niedersachsen. Zur Aktualität geographischer Regionalforschung [Regionalisation of the Economy – Regionalisation of the policy in Lower Saxony. About the relevance of Geographic regional research]. Berichte zur Deutschen Landeskunde, 68, 85–110.
   Google Scholar
• Domanski, D., Howaldt, J., & Kaletka, C. (2019). A comprehensive concept of social innovation and its implications for the local context – On the growing importance of social innovation ecosystems and infrastructures. European Planning Studies. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1639397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewers, H.-J., & Wettmann, R. W. (1980). Innovation-oriented regional policy. Regional Studies, 14(3), 161–179. doi: 10.1080/09595238000185171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulconbridge, J. (2010). Global architects. Learning and innovation through communities and constellations of practice. Environment and Planning A, 42(12), 2842–2858. doi: 10.1068/a4311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florida, R. (1995). Toward the learning region. Futures, 27(5), 527–536. doi: 10.1016/0016-3287(95)00021-N
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forester, J. (1999). The deliberative practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Freytag, H. L., & Windelberg, J. (1978). Ein Ansatz für eine integrierte regionale Innovationsstrategie [An approach for an integrated regional innovation strategy]. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 7, 527–534.
   Google Scholar
• Füg, F. (2015). Reflexive Regionalpolitik als soziale innovation. Vom Blick in die Sackgasse zur kollektiven regionalen Neuerfindung. [Reflexive regional policy as a social innovation: From the view into the dead end to collective regional reinvention]. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, (3), 245–259.
   Google Scholar
• Fürst, D. (2001). Die “learning region“ – Strategisches Konzept oder Artefakt? [The “learning region“ – strategic concept or artefact?]. In H.-F. Eckey, M. Junckernheinrich, H. Karl, N. Werbeck, & R. Wink (Eds.), Ordnungspolitik als konstruktive Antwort auf wirtschaftspolitische Herausforderungen [Regulatory policy as Constructive Response to Eeconomic political challenges] (pp. 71–89). Lucius & Lucius: Stuttgart.
   Google Scholar
• Ganser, K., Siebel, W., & Sieverts, T. (1993). Die Planungsstrategie der IBA Emscher Park. Eine Annäherung [The planning strategy of the IBA Emscher Park: An approximation]. RaumPlanung, 61, 112–118.
   Google Scholar
• Grabher, G. (1988). De-Industrialisierung oder Neo-Industrialisierung: Innovationsprozesse und Innovationspolitik in traditionellen Industrieregionen [De-Industrialization or Neo-Industrialization: Innovation processes and innovation policy in traditional industrial regions]. Berlin: Edition Sigma.
   Google Scholar
• Grabher, G. (1993). The embedded firm: On the socioeconomics of interfirm relations. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Grabher, G., & Ibert, O. (2014). Distance as asset: Knowledge collaboration in hybrid virtual communities. Journal of Economic Geography, 14, 97–123. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbt014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabher, G., & Thiel, J. (2015). Mobilizing action, incorporating doubt: London’s reflexive strategy of hosting the Olympic Games 2012. In G. Grabher, & J. Thiel (Eds.), Perspectives in Metropolitan research: Self-Induced Shocks: Mega-projects and Urban development (pp. 87–98). Berlin: Jovis.
   Google Scholar
• Hassink, R. (2001). The learning region: A fuzzy concept or a sound theoretical basis for modern regional innovation policies? Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 45(3–4), 219–230. doi: 10.1515/zfw.2001.0013
   Google Scholar
• Hassink, R. (2007). The Strength of weak lock-ins: The renewal of the Westmünsterland textile industry. Environment and Planning A, 39(5), 1147–1165. doi: 10.1068/a3848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Häußermann, H., & Siebel, W. (1994). Wie organisiert man Innovationen in nichtinnovativen milieus? [How to organize innovations in non-innovative milieus?]. In R. Kreibich, A. S. Schmid, W. Siebel, T. Sieverts, & P. Zlonicky (Eds.), Bauplatz Zukunft: Dispute über die Entwicklung von Industrieregionen [Construction site future: Disputes over the development of industrial regions] (pp. 52–64). Essen: Fuldaer Verlagsanstalt.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2013). Circuits of knowledge and techniques: The transnational flow of planning ideas and practices. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(5), 1510–1526. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.12044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesse, J. J., & Zöpel, C. (1990). Der Staat der Zukunft [The state of the future]. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
   Google Scholar
• Honeck, T. (2016). The importance of being Berlin: How narratives make urban policies travel “against the current” based on a study of temporary uses in Germany. Unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Ibert, O. (2003). Innovationsorientierte Planung: Verfahren und Strategien zur organisation von innovation [Innovation-oriented planning: Procedures and strategies for the organisation of innovation]. Opladen: Leske & Budrich.
   Google Scholar
• Ibert, O., Christmann, G. C., Jessen, J., & Walther, U.-J. (2015). Innovationen in der räumlichen Planung. [Innovations in spatial planning]. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, (3), 171–182.
   Google Scholar
• Kreibich, R., Schmid, A. S., Siebel, W., Sieverts, T., & Zlonicky, P. (1994). Bauplatz Zukunft: Dispute über die Entwicklung von Industrieregionen [Construction site future: Disputes over the development of industrial regions]. Essen: Bauplatz Zukunft.
   Google Scholar
• Larner, W., & Laurie, N. (2010). Travelling technocrats, embodied knowledges: Globalising privatisation in telecoms and water. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences, 41(2), 218–226. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lave, J. C., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Läpple, D. (1986). Trendbruch in der Raumentwicklung: Auf dem Weg zu einem neuen industriellen Entwicklungstyp? [Breaking the trend in spatial development: Towards a new industrial development model?]. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 11/12, 909–920.
   Google Scholar
• Lutzky, N., & Wettmann, R. W. (1982). Strategien der Raumordnung und Entwicklungsengpässe der 80er Jahre als Probleme der Landesentwicklung: Zusammenfassende Hypothesen [Strategies in spatial regulation and development shortfalls of the 80ies as problems of state development]. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 9, 741–744.
   Google Scholar
• Mayntz, R. (2004). Governance im modernen Staat [Governance in the contemporary state]. In A. Benz (Ed.), Governance - Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen: Eine Einführung [Governance – Governing in complex regulatory systems: An introduction] (pp. 65–76). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
   Google Scholar
• McCann, E., & Ward, K. (2012a). Assembling urbanism: Following policies and ‘studying through’ the sites and situations of policy making. Environment and Planning A, 44(1), 42–51. doi: 10.1068/a44178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCann, E., & Ward, K. (2012b). Policy assemblages, mobilities and mutations: Toward a multidisciplinary conversation. Political Studies Review, 10(3), 325–332. doi: 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2012.00276.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, K. (1997). The learning region: Institutions, innovation and regional renewal. Regional Studies, 31(5), 491–503. doi: 10.1080/00343409750132289
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moulaert, F., Jessop, B., Hulgård, L., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). Social innovation: A new stage in innovation process analysis? In F. Moulaert, D. MacCallum, A. Mehmood, & A. Hamdouch (Eds.), The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research (pp. 110–130). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Moulaert, F., & Sekia, F. (2003). Territorial innovation models: A critical Survey. Regional Studies, 37(3), 289–302. doi: 10.1080/0034340032000065442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, F. C., & Ibert, O. (2015). (Re-)sources of innovation: Understanding and comparing time-spatial innovation dynamics through the lens of communities of practice. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences, 65, 338–350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2010). Mobilizing policy: Models, methods, and mutations. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences, 41(2), 169–174. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2012). Follow the policy: A distended case approach. Environment and Planning A, 44(1), doi: 10.1068/a44179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2015). Fast policy: Experimental statecraft at the thresholds of neoliberalism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Piore, M., & Sabel, C. F. (1984). The second industrial divide: Possibilities for prosperity. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Prince, R. (2010). Policy transfer as policy assemblage: Making policy for the creative industries in New Zealand. Environment and Planning A, 42(1), 169–186. doi: 10.1068/a4224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prognos. (2016). Lehren aus dem Strukturwandel im Ruhrgebiet für die Regionalpolitik. [Lessons from the structural change in the Ruhr Area for regional policy]. Retrieved from http://www.prognos.com/uploads/tx_atwpubdb/151111_Prognos_Endbericht_ Lehren_aus_dem_Strukturwandel__1_.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ritter, E. H. (1979). Der kooperative Staat: Bemerkungen zum Verhältnis von Staat und Wirtschaft [The cooperative state: Remarks on the relation between state and economy]. Archiv des öffentlichen Rechts, 104, 389–413.
   Google Scholar
• Roy, A. (2012). Ethnographic circulations: Space-time relations in the worlds of poverty management. Environment and Planning A, 44(1), 31–41. doi: 10.1068/a44180
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schumpeter, J. A. (1911). Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung [Theory of economic development]. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.
   Google Scholar
• Siebel, W. (2015). Mega-events as vehicles of urban policy. In G. Grabher, & J. Thiel (Eds.), Perspectives in Metropolitan research: Self-induced shocks: Mega-projects and urban development (pp. 87–98). Berlin: Jovis.
   Google Scholar
• Siebel, W., Ibert, O., & Mayer, H.-N. (1999). Projektorientierte Planung - ein neues Paradigma? [Project-oriented planning – a new paradigm?]. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 3/4, 163–172.
   Google Scholar
• Stein, U. (2006). Lernende Stadtregion: Verständigungsprozesse über Zwischenstadt. [Learning urban regions: Understanding Zwischenstadt]. Wuppertal: Müller + Busmann.
   Google Scholar
• Temenos, C., & McCann, E. (2012). The local politics of policy mobility: Learning, persuasion, and the production of a municipal sustainability fix. Environment and Planning A, 44(6), 1389–1406. doi: 10.1068/a44314
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Temenos, C., & McCann, E. (2013). Geographies of policy mobilities. Geography Compass, 7(5), 344–357. doi: 10.1111/gec3.12063
   Google Scholar
• Vaatz, A. (1997). Eröffnung, Begrüßung und Einführung [Opening, welcome and introduction]. In Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ARL) (pp. 1–3). Hannover: Verlag der ARL.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, A. (2014). Moving policy: Global and local characters circulating bus rapid transit through South African cities. Urban Geography, 35(8), 1238–1254. doi: 10.1080/02723638.2014.954459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, A. (2015). Competing for knowledge: Leaders and laggards of bus rapid transit in South Africa. Urban Forum, 26(2), 203–221. doi: 10.1007/s12132-014-9248-y
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar